Reported Crimes And Misdeeds by Concealed Weapons License And Permit-Holders

The gun lobby claims that only “law-abiding citizens” have concealed weapons licenses or
permits. From that assumption, the gun lobby argues that having more people carrying loaded,
concealed firearms makes society "safer." Both claims are false.

In fact, too many dangerous people have obtained licenses to carry concealed weapons and
used their firearms in violent or irresponsible acts. According to one Utah official who
processed concealed carry license applications, “I would hazard a fairly educated guess that
better than 50 percent of the applicants have a criminal background of some kind.... The
only ones who get denied are the ones who have very current offenses or serious offenses.”

A spokesman from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation stated, “A blind person can get a
permit in Georgia, since all you have to do is pass a background check. And that person
can be arrested the very next week for a felony, convicted of that felony the next month and
still have that permit for the next five years.”

Or, as one Indianapolis police officer stated, “You can have an extensive criminal history and
still have (a permit). At some point you should say enough is enough.”

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons. I think that creates a potential
atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations."
-- Barack Obama, April 2008, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

26. As good as turning to gun toters for information.

5. What crap.

"The gun lobby claims that only “law-abiding citizens”" - I would like that cited

"From that assumption, the gun lobby argues that having more people carrying loaded,
concealed firearms makes society "safer." Both claims are false. " - and so is that straw-man that the author created.

"In fact, too many(how many would that be?) dangerous people have obtained licenses to carry concealed weapons and used their firearms in violent or irresponsible acts. According to one Utah official(official what? mail-room, janitor, desk clerk) who processed concealed carry license applications, “I would hazard a fairly educated guess that better than 50 percent of the applicants have a criminal background of some kind.... The only ones who get denied are the ones who have very current offenses or serious offenses.” " Then answer me this. Why the hell would this so-called official be giving out licenses to people with a criminal background?

6. I remember this *first* time they tried this schtick, the subject of much discussion on DU2.

It didn't have the desired effect, and for good reason- it was quickly determined by posters conversant with mathematics and other advanced subjects
that CWL holders not only are more law abiding on average than cops, they're far more law abiding than the members of Mayors Against
Illegal Guns

7. Oh my.

According to one Utah official who processed concealed carry license applications, “I would hazard a fairly educated guess that better than 50 percent of the applicants have a criminal background of some kind.... The only ones who get denied are the ones who have very current offenses or serious offenses.”

An anonymous source hazards a guess: sounds pretty convincing to me. Here's a tip: processing concealed carry license applications is not the same thing as conducting background checks. We're talking about a paper-shuffler here.

A spokesman from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation stated, “A blind person can get a permit in Georgia, since all you have to do is pass a background check. And that person can be arrested the very next week for a felony, convicted of that felony the next month and still have that permit for the next five years.”

Only if law enforcement isn't doing its job. I'm assuming that felony convictions in Georgia are grounds for immediate revocation, as they are in most states. The missing part of the process is law enforcement going out and confiscating those permits and guns. Why aren't they doing that?

8. Do you think this is compelling?

10. He's counting on people not actually reading the thread, just his "headline"

On DU2 we had pretty much moved away from any idiot quoting either the "Brady bunch 'o liars" or the NRA. That thinned the herd pretty effectively since some obviously weren't able to express themselves without ranting and name calling.

I guess on DU3 we'll have to go through that exercise all over again with the latest crop of gun grabbers that discovered the Gungeon and are going to correct all of our wrong thinking ... or demand that Skinner shut the Gungeon down completely because they can't win an argument. (I'm assuming that since "Gun Nuts" is acceptable discourse that "Gun Grabbers" must be as well.)

11. Important to note

"It is important to note, however, that these incidents represent only a fraction of the total
number of dangerous and deadly incidents involving concealed carry licensees. This is the
case because a suspect’s status as a concealed carry permit-holder is often not reported by law
enforcement or the media, and also because such information is steadily becoming less available to
the public due to gun lobby intimidation."

14. Then how did *they* get the information, and where are their sources cited?

Also note that "...dangerous and deadly incidents involving concealed carry licensees." could mean anything from a right turn from the left-hand lane
to attempted murder- yet they do not elaborate on what their definition of "dangerous and deadly" is.

That which is asserted without evidence can be likewise dismissed without evidence.

18. Oh, I read it. A lot of "alleged" and "charged" there.

Should we have judged the validity of Occupy movement by media reports of arrests? Or opposition to the Iraq war?
Not big on that whole 'due process' thing, are you?

And my comments above remain just as true now as it was the first time the BC tried this:

it was quickly determined by posters conversant with mathematics and other advanced subjects
that CWL holders not only are more law abiding on average than cops, they're far more law abiding than the members of Mayors Against
Illegal Guns.

12. What?

In fact, too many dangerous people have obtained licenses to carry concealed weapons and
used their firearms in violent or irresponsible acts. According to one Utah official who
processed concealed carry license applications, “I would hazard a fairly educated guess that
better than 50 percent of the applicants have a criminal background of some kind.... The
only ones who get denied are the ones who have very current offenses or serious offenses.”

A spokesman from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation stated, “A blind person can get a
permit in Georgia, since all you have to do is pass a background check. And that person
can be arrested the very next week for a felony, convicted of that felony the next month and
still have that permit for the next five years.”

Or, as one Indianapolis police officer stated, “You can have an extensive criminal history and
still have (a permit). At some point you should say enough is enough.”

What? This makes no sense. Most states use the federal NICS background check system to run background checks for disqualifying criminal histories.

If you have a criminal history logged in NICS, you don't pass. It's as simple as that.

Now if the states don't provide accurate information to the NICS system, that is bad, but that is also the state's problem.

If Georgia is not checking the status of its CCW permit holders to see if any permits need to be revoked or not, shame on Georgia.

But we know that all of this guessing is probably bullshit at face value.

How many criminals do you think bother with the bureaucracy and expense of trying to risk obtaining a CCW permit when they know they aren't qualified to have one? Don't you think that such people are just going to keep ignoring the law like they did when they did whatever disqualified them from owning guns in the first place?

The vast majority of people who bother going through the CCW permit process are law abiding citizens who are willing to jump through extra hoops and pay extra fees for a voluntary action.

16. Dumbest shit ever.

If you hand a police officer your CPL, they will RUN IT to ensure it is still valid. Who cares if you have a piece of paper that is not valid?

If you CARRY with a felony conviction, you will be popped for another felony.

This is as stupid as whining that a driver can get a license, be popped for DUI the next day, license revoked and OH MY GOSH, have a valid-appearing piece of plastic for the next 4 years that says you can drive! OH NO

And of course, as soon as you hand that piece of plastic to someone who might need to verify it, you get popped for driving with a suspended license.

Your source is grossly misrepresenting this issue, and is therefore a liar. Have a nice day.

25. You seem familiar.

24. Why would criminals applying for permits be counted as an indictment against permits?

Isn't the purpose of permit applications to allow authorities the opportunity to perform a background check and thus deny permits to criminals? That's not a failure; that's a case-study in the system working. The nameless, faceless bureaucrat is responsible for not seeing bad people get permits.